Comments

Excuse me. Does any Christian really have a problem with paying 10% of their
increase to their Church? All of these candidates are Christian men. Don't they
all pay 10% of their income to their church? I mean, if they are Bible
believing Christians they all pay 10%. Its right there in Malachi 3:8-12. And
everyone knows a tithe is a tenth. So I suspect all of these guys pay that and
it is a non issue.

Less Is MoreOgden, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 9:00 p.m.

"To me a flat consumption taxes with deductions, exceptions, and credits
makes the most sense." Sorry, I meant to say without deductions,
exceptions, and credits.

Time For A Tea PartyOgden, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 8:58 p.m.

Mitt Romney donated $3,000,000 to charity and paid $3,000,000 in taxes and
somehow this is considered bad or questionable. Obama panted a wall for the MLK
day of service. I rest my case.

Less Is MoreOgden, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 8:53 p.m.

To me taxes and tithing are fundamental principles of investing in God and
Country equally. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to contribute, take
ownership, participate. In this case tithing, at 10% for everyone, all
participate at the same rate. I have found that living on the remaining 90% of
my income has been a sacrifice, but never overwhelming from childhood to raising
children with low-income, to my current above average wage. The checks are now
larger, but I feel grateful to participate just the same. By donating to
charities outside the church, I feel like I'm part of my community. My feeling
is that taxes should be administered the same. We are disenfranchising citizens
if they don't participate, take ownership of their country. To me a flat
consumption taxes with deductions, exceptions, and credits makes the most sense.

MurrayMikeMurray, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 2:31 p.m.

Okay let me get this straight. First, people were worried about how much money
Mitt was making and if he was paying his fair share of taxes. We discovered he
indeed was paying the amount he was supposed to. Now people are concerned that
he's not paying exactly 10% tithe? Oh, he paid to little, must not be a good
church member. Oh, he paid to much, now the church will influence his decisions
as president. What's next, did he give to much to the Salvation Army. People
will try to knock down Mitt anyway they can. They can't believe he's just a
decent guy, unlike his opponent, Newt.

KithHUNTINGTON BEACH, CA

Jan. 27, 2012 2:24 p.m.

Wait, Midvaliaen you just said tithing is not under any microscope. Mitt might
be, and tithing is a part of that. So, if Mitt is under the microscope, tithing
is a part of that, therefore tithing is partly under the microscope yet is not
under the microscope? I don't understand. Can someone explain this to me?

On another note, we as LDS believe that god asks for 10% of our
increase. This is his world. Us being here and what we receive are because he
allows it. Giving him 10% of what is his is too much? I don't understand this
concept either.

MidvalieanMIDVALE, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 11:27 a.m.

Article is misleading at best. Tithing is NOT under any microscope. Mitt might
be, and tithing is a part of that, but LDS tithing is not under fire and won't
be and hasn't been. The persecution complex in full swing right now.

reenie72Sierra Vista, AZ

Jan. 27, 2012 10:49 a.m.

Well Thinkman, you did miss a thing or two. Included is Humanitarian Aid in
America and all over the world, donations for the poor and needy and many
others. Apparently, the government long ago, decided it was a good idea to have
Americans help others all over the world and that it was worthy of a tax
deduction. Maybe you should try it. I have seen many Mormons working - for
nothing, no pay, to help a neighbor or someone on the street, etc. These are
people who just care about people. We help even if we can't deduct it when we
file our tax. Why are you concerned about this?

giantfanFarmington, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 9:25 a.m.

Pagan,

So you pay a higher tax rate than Mitt. So what? Is he
cheating the system? No. Since the majority of his income is capital gains,
taxed at 15%, then he's paying what the system tells him to. Should he really
write a check for the difference that you think is appropriate? That's the
problem I have with liberals, they're always so eager to spend other people's
money.

Are you also saying that you don't take deductions on your
taxes that you're legally entitled to? If you do take legal deductions then
please explain the problem here with Mitt? If you don't then the majority of us
would consider that incredibly foolish. Either way, you're just plain wrong in
your criticism of Mitt.

IJHyrum, Ut

Jan. 27, 2012 6:29 a.m.

It is very interesting to see how many of you (who I suspect have nothing to do
with the dispersment of church funds) know so much about the dispersement of
church funds. I have served as a Bishop and I do not know all about this
subject but I can tell you that if a missionary needs help funding his mission,
it does not come out of the tithing fund. Most of the time individual member
come forward to help. The living allowance for GA's comes out of the taxable
funds of the church and if a member needs help with their mortgage or food, that
is supplied by the Bishop from the fast offering fund.

Many
commentors bash on the media for not getting the facts right.

Please,
in any of your "reporting", get the facts and not just something you
have heard or you think sounds right.

DBeckEagle Mountain, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 5:53 a.m.

None of the current field of candidates is without something akin to odd
behavior. None of them are without something that screams "don't vote for
me." None of them, as is painfully obvious in poll after poll, seems
capable of garnering sufficient national votes to win in November. The best the
Republicans can do is to hope for a brokered convention where they can
essentially start over and mount a serious campaign. These candidates are
outdoing each other by pushing everything further right when the country as a
whole seems far more moderate or centrist overall. This is one of those
inherent problems with our system. Every 4 to 8 years we elect someone who is
on the opposite side of the same coin as the previous president. They don't
really represent the majority. And even when they stick with their platform as
a candidate, they are badmouthed and targeted because people only listen to
extremism on the radio.

RichardBMurray, UT

Jan. 27, 2012 5:39 a.m.

What he gives is between him and God. It's only a issue for those who want to
make it an issue.

wrzSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 10:45 p.m.

@Axe-man:

"Pagan is mistaken."

Pagan may not be
mistaken.

The tax 'rate' and the 'percentage paid in taxes' could be
two different numbers. For example, a single person with $175,000 (2010 year)
taxable income will be in the 33% tax bracket but pays only 24% in income tax.
That's because income taxes are progressive... the tax rate increases as the
taxable base amount increases.

wrzSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:14 p.m.

@Pagan:

"At the same time, Romney gave nearly $3 million to
charity about half of that amount to the Mormon Church which helped LOWER his
effective tax rate to a modest 14 percent...' - article. Less than I pay in
taxes, I know that."

I suspect you paid the tax rate in
accordance with, and required by the tax code passed by the US Congress.

I also suspect that Romney did the same thing... else he surely would
have been under audit by the Federal Internal Revenue Service Audit Division.

To feel that Romney should write a check to IRS for taxes due... then
add some additional tax amount according to someone's calculations, is fool
hearty.

Warren Buffet thinks the rich should pay more in taxes.
Well, Warren, Write a check and send it in.

It is understandable why
Warren wouldn't mind that the wealthy pay more since his entire wealth, at his
death, will be donated to charities. What difference to him if it goes to IRS
or a charity?

I'm sure Mitt (and millions and millions of taxpayers,
myself included) would rather their wealth go to descendents instead of the
government.

Axe-manOREM, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 3:27 p.m.

Pagan is mistaken. He claims he pays 30% "back to his country": assume
that's federal income taxes and no state, sales, property, or FICA, which go
elsewhere than "his country." Assume "Single" for tax
status, with minimum standard deduction.

Pagan claims he pays
30%, which isn't a marginal tax rate, so either he makes over $89,401 ($5,800
standard deduction + 28% minimum) and calls his 28% marginal rate
"30%", or his 30% is a lie, or he grossly overpays and needs TurboTax
or H&R Block. Calculating tax for marginal rates below his 28%, he only pays
20.4%, and this assumes no 401(k), state tax, or mortgage deductions he may
claim. Absolute worst case, earning $89,401 (good money for a single guy in
Utah), Pagan pays ~20%.

If you paid more in taxes than Mitt Romney, you are a very
fortunate person.

Dark ReaverSOUTH JORDAN, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 2:49 p.m.

I have no issue at all with the idea of voluntary tithe, other then how it ends
up spent. Though that is between the religion and it's diety.I do find the
ideal that amount tithed is tied to the level of eternal salvation, a bit
disturbing. Though again, between you and your diety, he/she will determine your
judgement, not the religions followers.To each their own.I do find
the thought that God would require any defined level of financial donation
related to treatment in afterlife, annoying.God's love is free, afterlife
would be determind by faith in that, anymore is like buying a plane ticket, will
you spend for 1st class or buisness class.What do I know though? I'm just
man.

hope a lotSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 2:48 p.m.

Can any one tell me the name of"a business,or a church, or any other
entities that does not pay a staff to administer their products or
believes?" plus the thousands of construction workers,and office workers
who are not on welfare because of tithing.How about the perpetual
education fund, sending many people of other nations to school, the list goes on
and on. I love to pay tithing. Irv

toosmartforyouFarmington, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 2:30 p.m.

@ Pagan

You can reduxe you tax burden, too, by donating to charity.
It appears maybe you ought to consider doing that, rather than critisizing other
who choose to donate.

@ Ms Molli

Going to heaven (using
your logic) is indeed voluntary. No one holds a gun to your head to tithe, live
the word of wisdom, be faithful to your spouse, go home or visiting teaching,
teach a sunday school class, attend church meetings, etc. Its just like no one
will force you to be a good neighbor, friend, relative or business associate.
And no one will force you to be a "member in good standing" either.
You choose for yourself....that's called agency and you enjoy it as do I.

A voice of ReasonSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 2:25 p.m.

Ms Molli,

A teacher may require you to spend 10% of workload on
homework and pass regular tests in order to receive an "A" grade, a
pat on the back, and a college credit, and a diploma.

Assume that a
college degree is the only way to get a decent job. I volunteer and willfully
(as a free agent) decide to go to college to get that reward. My going to
college was in fact voluntary. If it was involuntary I wouldn't have a choice.
You can choose God's laws and receive from him. Or you can choose to reject God
and receive from the alternative. Just because one is behind a gate of captivity
and one behind a golden curtain doesn't take away your choice.

I say
this in respect- It just seems more like you have a problem with God 'placing
requirements' on us. Is this true? If so, why is that bad? If not, what else
could you mean?

Jeff29Cedar City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 2:12 p.m.

I am confused by all the those criticizing the amount of taxes that Romney pays.
No one seems to be accusing him of illegal activities, but are upset that he
only paid 14%. What do you suggest? Should he have not taken his legal
deductions? Should he have volunteered to pay more than the required amount for
capital gains? He simply paid the legally required amount. Do you expect him
to pay more?

If you think that Romney and others like him should pay
more taxes, you should select the candidate who is most likely to simplify the
tax code (other than Ron Paul, that person is Romney).

justmesalMOUNTAIN VIEW, WY

Jan. 26, 2012 2:09 p.m.

To: Danish American. You're right. I've a friend who is an IRS tax auditor. She
says that if you count state income and property taxes as well as federal, and
you don't give anything to charities, not church or otherwise you would pay
close to 30%. I happen to live in a state that does not have state income tax,
sales tax is 5% except on food items, there is no tax on food (on non-prepared
food that is, there is tax at restaurants or deli foods in a grocery store.),
and our property tax like our sales tax is relatively low when looking at what
other states near by are paying. What we should be concerned about with Romney's
taxes is not what percent he paid but if he pays an honest tax according to the
laws. Since I am sure the Government keeps close tabs on the 1% top richest men
in America and he wasn't hiding his Cayman Island stash, as Liberal Larry called
it, nor his Swiss bank account, maybe that points out to his honesty.
Considering Newt's dishonesty-cheating on wives, nice to see some honesty
somewhere.

Ms MolliBountiful, Utah

Jan. 26, 2012 1:49 p.m.

I wouldn't say that paying tithing is voluntary. Not when a church believes
that the only way you may live with God again is to be a full tithe payer (among
other requirements). Not when a church believes that the only way you may have
an eternal marriage is to be a full tithe payer (among other requirements). Not
when a church believes that the only way you may have your family in tact
eternally is to be a full tithe payer (among other requirements). Not when a
church believes that it is the eternal perspective that its members should be
focusing on (which includes being a full tithe payer). Doesn't really look
voluntary to me if you believe the doctrine.

A voice of ReasonSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 1:46 p.m.

I'm sad that I didn't see this until now. If I could, I would go back and post
my comment first in order to persuade as many as I can of the truth in the
principle and act of paying tithing.

The idea that my giving my 10%
to God's church is laughed at, hated, or even considered slightly unreasonable
by some religious figures only testifies to the truth in our principle of
tithing.

In the Book of Mormon, Zeezrom tried to trick Amulek in
order to destroy him for his own financial gain. Today we also see many
criticize the LDS Church. An LDS Bishop, an LDS Missionary, members of the
Mormon Tabernacle Choir, and the vast majority of Church callings are not
compensated financially. We do not pay ourselves but pay God and pay the rest of
humanity through service. Yet our financial decisions are in question from
people who take income and call it service.

Anyone in doubt of my
argument may read Alma, chapter 11 and then re-read this post.

Dark ReaverSOUTH JORDAN, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 1:42 p.m.

pmccombsOrem, UT"perhaps some truths are best kept away from
the light of day"

I would sit back and think deeply where that
leads.Good vs Evil, Light vs Darkness. One finger hidden in the dark is a
pair of hands not fully bathed in light. Where one finger leads the rest may
follow.

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 1:36 p.m.

'As a former tax auditor I know most people in the so-called middle class pay an
"effective" tax rate of 15% to 16% even though the tax tables show
them at 30% to 35%. Perhaps you need a different accountant.' - Danish American
| 12:36 p.m. Jan. 26, 2012

'But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income and thats
actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our
office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36
percent.' - article

BobPPort Alice, B.C.

Jan. 26, 2012 12:40 p.m.

Romney was not hiding his Swiss or Caymans accounts - they were right there on
his tax returns.

BobPPort Alice, B.C.

Jan. 26, 2012 12:39 p.m.

I give to the Perpetual Education Fund, tithing and fast offerings.

Danish AmericanPayson, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 12:36 p.m.

Pagan: You must be making big bucks with no deductions, exemptions, etc. As a
former tax auditor I know most people in the so-called middle class pay an
"effective" tax rate of 15% to 16% even though the tax tables show
them at 30% to 35%. Perhaps you need a different accountant.

This though..."Mormon children are expected to begin tithing
from their very first allowance," Givens told Gilgoff. "And there's
never any variation on the 10 percent, whether you're on welfare or you're a
millionaire."

A bit excessive to me. Give the children a break,
faith is in your heart not your wallet. Childhood is too short, an extra 2
dollar toy they get to choose can lift a child's spirit for days on end. There
is a big difference between 10% from a person on welfare and 10% from a
millionaire.

Good Grief! Why do people worry about what Mormons do with their money and what
the authorities in the church do with it? We give VOLUNTARILY because we know
where the money goes, believe that is what God would have us do, and are happy
to donate it. Why don't you people who are so wound up about others finances
find something else to complain about? When was the last time you made a
donation to the needy?!

giantfanFarmington, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 11:33 a.m.

Pagan,

"Less than I pay in taxes, I know that."

You pay more than $3M in taxes? Good for you! Thanks for ponying up, big guy!

ksampowFarr West, Utah

Jan. 26, 2012 11:21 a.m.

The article seems to suggest that Romney may not be exact on his 10%. From
other articles that have appeared in the DN it is clear that not all of the
income is cash. (Stock, etc.) So it is perfectly understandable that the
amount contributed may need adjusting in the following year, to match the actual
value of the income.Sometimes "10% of your increase" is clear,
sometimes it is not. If you are receiving distributions from a 401K, for
example, how much of it is income? Some of the money received would be
withdrawing what you had put in prevously - not income. But some would be
income - contributions made by your employer, and interest.Defining what
is 10% of one's income is left to the individual conscience.

PaganSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 10:45 a.m.

x2 stories about Mitt Romney's tithing...

I wonder if the Deseret
News will allow this post...

about how much Romney pays in
TAXES...

**Romney paid $3M in federal income tax in 2010 By Stephen
Braun AP Published by DSNews 01/24/12

At the same time, Romney
gave nearly $3 million to charity about half of that amount to the Mormon
Church which helped LOWER his effective tax rate to a modest 14 percent...' -
article

Less than I pay in taxes, I know that.

JimMesa, Az

Jan. 26, 2012 10:18 a.m.

Irrespective of how much Romney pays, he just pays 10%, plus any other
contribution that he cares to make. If anything, Romnney should be praised for
keeping the commmandments, as in the book of Malachi, but Romney getting praise
for that what happen any day soon. People seem to be more interested in a shark
frenzy feed more that anything else. Perhaps we should be more interested in
his policies than his beliefs.

pmccombsOrem, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:48 a.m.

@John Pack, I simply reference the quote from Pres. Hinkley in the article about
"financing the church." The church, of course, is that legal entity,
"The Corporation of the Presiding Bishop." I make a distinction
between financing the church and, say, financing the poor of the church.

@snowman, you may be right about some of those categories. Perhaps some
of these areas are funded by interest taken on investments and so forth. As
UtahBlueDevil said, the Church doesn't reveal its finances... perhaps some
truths are best kept away from the light of day. We do get occasional glimpses,
though, from the corporate insider who has observed perhaps more than was
strictly intended (for instance, anthropologist Daymon Smith).

Kirk R GravesWest Jordan, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:41 a.m.

-Temples - Tithing and Temple Funds-Ward/Stake buildings - Tithing-Seminary buildings - Tithing-University system: - Some tithing, also
Self Funding as Not For Profit-Missionaries - Missionary Fund (perhaps
some Tithing, but is shouldn't need it)-Stipends/salaries - Paid for out
of For Profit corporations the Church has owned for a very long time.-City
mall in SLC - For Profit Corporations-Visitor centers - Tithing-Members' mortgages - Fast Offering (only)-General Conference -
Tithing-Church Educational System - Salaries paid out of Tithing-General Church employees - Tithing-FamilySearch - I don't know-Wellfare operations - Operational costs: Tithing. Everything else: Fast
Offerings and Misc Donations-Real-estate - Tithing-Computer systems
and office supplies - Tithing-Church fleet - Tithing-Travel -
Tithing-printing - Tithing-Media - since this supports the Church's
mission I assume Tithing, but I am not sure.-Clothing - If you mean Behive
Clothing, that is a Not For Profit entitiy that funds itself (in fact, prices
where reduced drastically a few years ago because they were making too much)

Kirk R GravesWest Jordan, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:30 a.m.

Just to clarify the Thinkman's original post:

The LDS Church has the
following funding sources:1. Tithing (voluntary donations of members based
on 10% of individual's income)2. Fast Offerings (Voluntary donations)3. Temple Funds (Voluntary donations)4. Missionary Fund (Families paying
for their children to serve missions + Voluntary donations of others)5.
For Profit corporations (privately held entities that pay tax and are legally
separate from the Church)6. Not For Profit Corporations (privately held
entities that perform a variety functions, usually just self-sustaining)7.
A Variety of other misc donation categories used for specific purposes (these
represent a relatively small amount of the over-all funding)

Rocket ScienceBrigham City, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:27 a.m.

The whole subject came up because Newt demanded Mitt release his tax returns
before the SC primary. Now we have to discuss Mitt giving away a good portion
of his earnings. We see Mitt is consistent with his faith and is charitable
person. Mmany have to bash how he shouldn't be able to deduct those amounts or
use the legal (capital gains) he qualifies for.

It is interesting
that Newt did not ask for Mitt's tax returns until just after he released his.
Who says he should demand the timing of voluntarily releasing tax returns.
There is no law that says one has to at all. Other candidates have not yet
release theirs. Newt just saw he could get traction from the anti-wealthy
feelings of many so he is using the same tactics as the democrats. But Newt's
Idea is to eliminate the capital gains tax altogether. Mitt Romney's idea for
taxing capital gains is to only allow two hundred thousand dollars of earnings
before then taxes would kick in.

Ponch#OGDEN, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 9:26 a.m.

I think the problem with Mitt's tithing is that it displays non-nominal
behavior.

First, would be LDS church membership. Most people in
Florida don't know much about the church. People fear the unknown.

Second, is the amount and regulation of tithing. It's unusual for people in
general to tithe so much of their income, and in such a formalized method (as
part of taxes). In catholic church, people just throw a few bucks into a hat for
the most part.

So from the Floridian perspective, some of this may
seem kind of weird. Considering my past perspective (I've lived mostly outside
of Utah), I would think it unusual, and would approach it apprehensively.

Of course, in Utah, it's normal behavior.

UtahBlueDevilDurham, NC

Jan. 26, 2012 8:42 a.m.

All you people who claim all these things are not paid for by tithing, how do
you know that? I have yet to see a financial breakdown on how the churchs
spends its money,ane from what sources. And if fact, I know that some of these
"no" answers are not accurate.

Can you please provide your
source for this information. And if all these things are not paid for with any
tithing money, please explain the funding model.

Frankly Romney's
tithing is a non issue here in North Carolina. Most the churches around here
have a tithe... nothing new under the sun on this issue.

snowmanProvo, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 8:26 a.m.

pmccombs | 7:41 p.m. Jan. 25, 2012 Orem, UT

Add salaries for
regular church employees and bureaucrats, They are not paid from tithing

FamilySearch, Isn't paid for by tithingLarge-scale wellfare
operations,Real-estate, Is Not paid with tithingComputer systems
and office supplies, Not paid with tithingChurch fleet and maintenance,Travel, Not paid with Tithinglots and lots of printing
(correlated/standardized curricula, tithing slips, etc., etc),Media such
as movies and ads,and Clothing Not paid with tithing

snowmanProvo, UT

Jan. 26, 2012 8:23 a.m.

Thinkman:

Let us list those things:-Temples No-Ward/Stake buildings No-Seminary buildings No-University system:
BYU, BYUI, BYUH Definitely not-Temples again no-Missionaries who
can't afford to pay their own way No-Stipends/salaries for General
Authorities General Authorities are not paid-City mall in SLC No-Temples No-Visitor centers No-Members' mortgages Definitely
not-Temples No-General Conference No-Church Educational
System Maybe-Temples No

You missed a lot.

liberal
larry: He didn't have to release his tax records. That is between him and the
Federal Government.

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Jan. 26, 2012 2:44 a.m.

pmccombs, What is the source for your quote?

Tithing is what
keeps the buildings maintained, allows the building of new buildings, allows the
publications of Church materials, is a factor in the publication of copies of
the Book of Mormon (although there is a Book of Mormon fund) and many other such
things. If building Church buildings and temples is not the Church side of the
Church, than what is?

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Jan. 26, 2012 2:41 a.m.

Political leaders have the right to base their policy decisions on their moral
goals. What they should not do is pass laws that forbid other peoples beluiefs.
No candidate for the presidency has advocated such.

People have the
right to seek government regulation of behavior. If you do not like the
regulation you favor, that is also your right. However public policy that
affects the entire population, such as questions of how the government will
think of a family and what purpose the government will ascribe to families, are
issues that should be decided by the people through the legislative process and
they have a right to use any methods they want to advocate such things, and to
hold opinions for any specific reason.

That said, there is
substantial non-religious discussions of why man/woman marriage is the optimal
situation.

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Jan. 26, 2012 2:37 a.m.

The claim "tithing should not count as tax deductable because it does not
help the needy" is misunderstanding possible tax deducations.

People can get tax deducations for donating to universities, for donating to
non-profit legal advocacy groups, for donating to groups that sponsor the arts
and for many other donations to groups that do not have benefitting the poor as
their primary, or even as any of their functions.

On the other hand
there are some charities that claim to be helping the poor but actually function
more to give large salaries to their employees. This is the point people make
about donations to LDS Humanitarian Services. The money donated there goes 100%
to help the poor. Overhead costs are funded from tithing.

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Jan. 26, 2012 2:34 a.m.

Thinkman, You missed LDS Employment centers (my previous point was they
accept everyone, I clearly said they did not do a possible exclusionary activity
I mentioned, I brought that up because many jobs require it to get highered.)2- The Mall in Salt Lake City is receiving no tithing funds towards its
building. President Hinckley made that 100% clear.3- The stipends the
general authorities and some mission presidents recieve are not funded from
tithing.

You also missed the publication of lesson manuals, the
creation of audio-visual equitment (such as the New Testament videos), the
creation of websites, the ward budgets and many other things.

NeanderthalSalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 10:48 p.m.

@Thinkman:

"Did I miss anything?"

Support
(groceries, rent, utilities) for the poor and needy.

And what do
contributions by Catholics and Evangelicals go for?

Mostly
preacher's/Priests salaries and benefits... and law suits by sexually molested
children (as reported several times in the Deseret News Paper).

spring streetSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 8:41 p.m.

S.Andrew Zaelit

"the national media will have to admit that the
religious aspect that they overlooked with Candidate Obama should have been
vetted more closely." This subject along with his birth certificate where
vetted well beyond reason during the last campaign just because they where
proven to be pointless and unfounded does not mean they where not covered. At
this point the only people that believe it is an issue are those that will never
be convinced no matter what anyone says or does.

pmccombsOrem, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 7:41 p.m.

Thinkman,

Add salaries for regular church employees and
bureaucrats,FamilySearch,Large-scale wellfare operations,Real-estate,Computer systems and office supplies,Church fleet and
maintenance,Travel,lots and lots of printing
(correlated/standardized curricula, tithing slips, etc., etc),Media such
as movies and ads,and Clothing

Probably not so much
"Mortgages for Members" or "Missionaries who can't afford to pay
their own way." Those would come from a local unit's fast offering fund in
the former case, or the local missionary fund. There are also general funds for
missionary and humanitarian aid in case there is a shortfall in the local unit,
but these are separate from tithing funds.

Gordon B. Hinkley said it
best, which I here summarize: Tithing keeps the business/capital end of the
church going. It's the corporate revenue stream. The ecclesiastical end of the
church (what other religions simply understand to be "church") is
funded by whatever additional donations, beyond tithing, the members choose to
give.

LDSareChristiansAnchorage, AK

Jan. 25, 2012 7:00 p.m.

@Thinkman,You missed the mark on these two.-Stipends/salaries for
General Authorities-City mall in SLC

These are funded from a
endownment/investment fund growing since the 1920's

UteMiguelGo Utes, CA

Jan. 25, 2012 6:56 p.m.

@Thinkman,I think you forgot temples.

liberal larrysalt lake City, utah

Jan. 25, 2012 6:06 p.m.

Talk about the gift that keeps on giving! Romney's taxes revealed that besides
his Cayman Islands stash, Mitt, also had a Swiss Bank Account. For being such
a genius Romney really has a tin ear when it comes to appearances. By not
releasing all of this tax records he has opened the door for his opponents to
start a process of "death by a thousand cuts" chorus of requests for
the rest of his tax records. Doesn't anyone remember the frothing over Obama's
birth certificate? Brace yourselves for the endless theories about what Romney
didn't report.

Free AgencySalt Lake City, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 5:45 p.m.

Romney's got nothing to be defensive about regarding being faithful to the
requirements of his Church. Surely we'd want our President to demonstrate
faithfulness to his/her deepest values.

But if he became President,
Romney would *not* have the right to base his national decisions--e.g., on gay
marriage--with the position his Church holds. Rick Santorum has, incredibly,
taken his Catholic Church's position into the public arena by saying that *no
one* should use contraceptives because "it's not how things are supposed to
be."

I hope Romney has a better understanding of the separation
of Church and State, and that, while giving his devotion to both, he respects
the boundaries of each.

ThinkmanProvo, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 5:20 p.m.

Mormon tithing money goes towards what exactly?

Let us list those
things:-Temples-Ward/Stake buildings-Seminary buildings-University system: BYU, BYUI, BYUH-Temples-Missionaries who can't
afford to pay their own way-Stipends/salaries for General Authorities-City mall in SLC-Temples-Visitor centers-Members'
mortgages-Temples-General Conference-Church Educational
System-Temples

Did I miss anything?

CottageCheeseSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 4:53 p.m.

S.Andrew

I agree. At first I was a little weary about bringing
religion to the table... but ultimately it might work out in Romney's favor.

S.Andrew ZaelitDeseret, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 4:32 p.m.

I can think of nothing better for Romney than to have the national media and the
Evangelical Christians to engage in religious scrutiny. Talk about a win win for
Romney should this gain traction. Hard core Evangelicals would be exposed for
religious bigotry once and for all, and the national media will have to admit
that the religious aspect that they overlooked with Candidate Obama should have
been vetted more closely. All Romney will have to do is sit back and let it play
out.

The sad part is that charitable donations to religion are very
common. Somehow, I doubt donations to the Catholic Church, local Jewish
Synagogue, or Evangelical Church would even blip on the radar. I suspect that
the national media would write story after story of praise if Obama donated
enough of his money to build a church, or if Newt donated a substantial sum to a
local Virginia Christian Church. The vast majority of Americans do not care
about the religious affiliation as much as the moral and ethical character of
the candidate that they support. However, religious bigotry is one of the most
difficult character flaws to eliminate.

MaudineSLC, UT

Jan. 25, 2012 4:27 p.m.

given all the legitimate reasons not to vote for Romney why worry about his
tithings?